How quaintly old-fashioned it looks, the advertising agency depicted in television's Mad Men,
circa 1963, when the men were men and the women were secretaries. But
many of the gender conflicts common to the workplace since men and women
started to work side by side still exist. And some new ones have been
born.

Hardly anyone worries anymore about whether cubicle neighbors should
date or whether men should hold the door for female coworkers. But the
enduring differences in how men and women communicate still have
ramifications that range from hurt feelings to missed promotions and
fewer pay raises.

No news here: Men are supposedly blunter and more aggressive and
appear self-confident even when they don't know what they're talking
about. Women are more tentative in voicing their opinions and appear
unsure of themselves even when they know very well what they're talking
about. As bosses, men tend to be more authoritarian and women more
collaborative. Men don't give much feedback; women want too much
feedback. Men are thought not to ask enough questions; women are thought
to ask too many questions. And so forth.

Deborah Tannen, a linguistics professor at Georgetown University,
wrote a book in 1994 about the different ways that men and women
communicate in the office. In the almost two decades since her Talking From 9 to 5
was published, Tannen hasn't seen a lot of changes. If women don't
sound accommodating enough, "they're seen as too aggressive or too
pushy," and if they come off as too accommodating, "they're seen as too
timid," she said. "Women are also more inclined to say, 'I'm sorry that
happened,' which is more likely to be seen as weak. They're seen as
lacking confidence--but that doesn't mean they are actually lacking
confidence." In other words, women who are indirect aren't necessarily
insecure, but they may be perceived that way.

Despite the many advances--and the surge of female leaders in business
and politics around the world--this misperception isn't going away. A
study in 2004 conducted by Melissa Thomas-Hunt of the University of
Virginia and Katherine Phillips of Columbia Business School found that
women are less likely to be viewed as experts than men are, even when
they have the requisite knowledge. In an experiment, 143 undergraduate
business students learned about Australian bushfires and then ranked 12
items in order of importance related to surviving one. Then they were
randomly assigned to groups of three to five individuals, usually a mix
of women and men, to share expertise.

Not only were women's opinions more often disregarded than men's, the
researchers found, but women who had no particular bushfire know-how
were viewed more favorably--by men and women alike--than women who knew
more, because they tended to agree with the predominant view instead of
challenge it. And women tended to evaluate themselves more harshly then
men on equivalent performances. "It's not actual expertise," the
researchers concluded, "but perceived expertise that conveys power and
status."

Communication per se isn't the problem, according to Linda Carli, who
lectures on psychology at Wellesley College and coauthored Through the Labyrinth: The Truth About How Women Become Leaders.
Women, she argues, carry a double burden--of proving their competence
and also coming across as warm and caring. "But they can't be too nice
or too warm or too competent," she said.

If so little is changing in workplace dynamics, what's the answer? Give up and build the cubicle walls higher?

Nope. What's crucial, experts say, is to bring these differences into
the open--not to denigrate but to understand. "Raising awareness," as
Tannen put it, "is the most important thing." Simply knowing that men
tend--tend--to be more authoritative and brusque and that women
tend to prefer collaboration and indirection can help both genders work
together.

Consider an experiment conducted at Case Western Reserve University
in 2008 on the willingness of men and women to forgive another person's
mistakes. Given a scenario in which someone acted wrongly, men generally
judged the transgressor more harshly than women did. But when men were
asked if they had ever misbehaved similarly, they suddenly became more
forgiving. Women, in general, didn't.

In the workplace, men are twice as likely as women to be rude and
uncivil, and they respond more quickly and directly to coworkers'
rudeness, management professors Christine Porath and Christine Pearson
concluded in their book, The Cost of Bad Behavior. "But that
doesn't mean women won't get even," Porath, who teaches at Georgetown,
pointed out. "They tend to respond passive-aggressively, such as
withholding needed information, spreading rumors, or the silent
treatment. We learn these ways of coping very young on the playground
and, sadly, they stick." Women tend not to confront incivility head-on
or to complain to a colleague or boss. Thus, the offender isn't
reprimanded or coached on a change in behavior, Porath said. "This
reinforces the inequality."

Men, indeed, may need to tone things down. But Eve Tahmincioglu, a columnist on careers for MSNBC.com,
thinks that women also need to toughen up. "I'm sick of getting e-mails
from women managers who take everything so personally," said
Tahmincioglu, the author of From the Sandbox to the Corner Office.
"I think it's keeping women from moving forward. Sometimes a [business]
report just sucks, and a guy can take it.... Women stew about it, e-mail
about it, tweet about it. They've got to get away from that."

Unimportant, perhaps--even petty. But the way workers present
themselves has all sorts of ramifications. Two of the biggest barriers
for women in advancing their careers are failure to make their
achievements known and to find people who could help their careers,
according to a survey conducted last year by Catalyst, a nonprofit group
that presses for workplace opportunities for women on three continents.
"When women were most proactive in making their achievements visible,"
the report states, "they advanced further, were more satisfied with
their careers, and had greater compensation growth than women who were
less focused on calling attention to their successes."

Women also need to find sponsors, not just mentors, said Susan
Nierenberg, Catalyst's vice president of global marketing. The
difference? A mentor is "someone who talks with you. A sponsor is
someone who talks about you, someone who advocates for you. Women are
mentored to death and not pro-moted. Men are mentored and sponsored--and
promoted."

Sheryl Sandberg, the chief operating officer at Facebook, is the
epitome of the highly successful businesswoman and mother. She has been
speaking around the country about her concern that women in the
workplace often "leave before they leave." That is, they start to
worry--long before there's any need--about whether they can simultaneously
raise a family and hold a high-powered job.

"Maybe it's the last year of med school when they say, 'I'll take a
slightly less interesting specialty because I'm going to want more
balance one day,' " Sandberg said in a commencement address at Barnard
College last spring. "Maybe it's the fifth year in a law firm when they
say, 'I'm not even sure I should go for partner, because I know I'm
going to want kids eventually.' ... And from that moment, they start
quietly leaning back." They don't pursue promotions or agree to overseas
transfers. Her "heartfelt message," Sandberg said, is "do not lean
back--lean in. Put your foot on the gas pedal and keep it there until the
day you have made a decision."

The good news, Wellesley's Carli said, is that some of the dynamics
of gender in the workplace may be changing at last. Women are becoming
more competitive and assertive, she said, while "we're increasingly
seeing the importance of social skills and speaking to people in a
pleasant voice as effective leadership. Men are being told they can't
just boss people around, but have to inspire people." And research has
shown, she said, that the presence of women at a high level in the
workplace correlates with an organization's financial success.

"Everything is moving in a positive direction," Carli declared. "It's just--if you look at the data, it's incrementally slow."